REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

13 Russian Nationals Indicted

POSTED BY: CAPTAINCRUNCH
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 17:28
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 14324
PAGE 4 of 5

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:54 AM

THGRRI


At times we reflect back on history. We remember events that have happened, especially ones of importance. Some of those historical events so boggle the mind they elicit a common response. How could people be so stupid?

Well, I give you Jack. People this stupid really do exist. The history of Trump and Russia is already being written. The truth of it will never penetrate Jacks sphere of ignorance. And people like Jack always move on to their next insane interpretations of current events. Sadly, another thing history has taught us is that there is never a shortage of stupid people.

Being stupid is not a crime. Nor should people be punished and ridiculed for being inflicted with this abnormality. Unless, I'll say that again, Unless, they are being stupid in a mean spirted way. Again, I give you Jack. He is an angry drunk lashing out, choosing to troll rather than offer substantive feedback or acknowledge even the simplest of truths.


T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:07 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Here's my response to your last post comrade troll sig
Keep digging.


BTW, the greatest threat to our democracy is people like you. You're willing to trample the Constitution because you're too stupid to put two thoughts together, and so your poor brain needs "protection" from scary facts and uncomfortable ideas.

Did you hear the patronizing from Friedman? The President would "explain" the problem in simple terms that the people would understand?? Jeez.




Simple like this sig.

Part One; Friedman is saying the Russians did it so lets take action, and is dismayed our president isn't doing so.

Part two; Sig is a Russian troll and upset because Friedman just criticized both Trump and Russia.


Did you sense the patronizing from me sig? Patronizing; To treat with an apparent kindness that betrays a feeling of superiority:

T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:23 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Golly. EXPERTS!!

So how might history look upon Trump?

Trump's mouth gives Experts all they need to know Trump spouts nonsense. Trump’s claim Mueller found ‘NO COLLUSION’ is Literal Nonsense.

One of Trump’s favorite methods to defend his innocence in the Russia investigation is to claim that any piece of evidence that does not explicitly assert his guilt is in fact evidence of his innocence. It is exactly like Trump saying he was cleared by the Warren Commission because the Warren Commission report makes no conclusion about Trump and Russia. However, Trump misread the indictment.

In fact the indictment declared that collusion has been detected. It didn’t name all of the conspirators, but the grand jury did definitely claim to know the names of conspirators who were not named in the indictment.

I quote paragraph 2 of www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download :

From in or around 2014 to the present, Defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016.

The indictment explicitly states that there are known unindicted co-conspirators. It does not address the question of whether one is, say, named Donald Trump.

We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:41 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.

Signym, JewelStaiteFan and GOP wisdom in Washington agree that there’s little reason to believe that Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation will end up proving much of interest.

But to believe that requires belief that after a decade of paying Manafort millions for his expertise to help pro-Russian candidates win elections in Ukraine, no one from Moscow thought to consult with him about how to help a pro-Russia candidate win an election in the United States.

And we have to believe that even though we know Trump Jr was enthusiastic about the idea of collaborating with Russia on obtaining anti-Hillary dirt, when he met with Russians on this very topic, they didn’t talk about it.

And we have to believe that Trump’s public call for Putin to hack more Clinton emails was completely random.

Trump–Russia skeptics call it a bizarre series of coincidences complete with a massive cover-up for no particular reason. Cover-up means Trump’s talk about firing Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Jeff Sessions, the FBI, etc. and Trump saying "No Collusion!" a dozen times a day.

But Trump isn’t an idiot. When he keeps on doing something, it’s probably for a reason. The cover-up is likely covering up serious wrongdoing.

Trump spent more than a year on the campaign trail consistently praising Vladimir Putin and defending him from critics, incurring political risks with no obvious upside for himself.

Jared Kushner was trying to create some kind of secure backchannel line of communication to Moscow that would be impenetrable by American intelligence.
www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-russia-back-channel-testimony-20
17-7


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:54 PM

THGRRI


And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.

Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.

T


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.

Signym, JewelStaiteFan and GOP wisdom in Washington agree that there’s little reason to believe that Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation will end up proving much of interest.

But to believe that requires belief that after a decade of paying Manafort millions for his expertise to help pro-Russian candidates win elections in Ukraine, no one from Moscow thought to consult with him about how to help a pro-Russia candidate win an election in the United States.

And we have to believe that even though we know Trump Jr was enthusiastic about the idea of collaborating with Russia on obtaining anti-Hillary dirt, when he met with Russians on this very topic, they didn’t talk about it.

And we have to believe that Trump’s public call for Putin to hack more Clinton emails was completely random.

Trump–Russia skeptics call it a bizarre series of coincidences complete with a massive cover-up for no particular reason. Cover-up means Trump’s talk about firing Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Jeff Sessions, the FBI, etc. and Trump saying "No Collusion!" a dozen times a day.

But Trump isn’t an idiot. When he keeps on doing something, it’s probably for a reason. The cover-up is likely covering up serious wrongdoing.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:23 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.

Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.

I guarantee that the Democrats will NOT get the necessary 2/3 majority in the 2018 election. Democrats shouldn’t get their hopes up that the special counsel will “save” them or the country from Trump. And as you said, Trump appeared on national television and explained to an NBC News audience that he improperly used his powers of office to remove FBI director Comey in an effort to shield his friends and associates from criminal scrutiny. The GOP shrugged that off, and eventually, the public (both Democrats and Republicans) moved on.

My guess is that whatever revelations are forthcoming from Mueller will fit a similar pattern — most people already have a negative view of Trump, so it’s hard to move the needle too much more on public opinion, and the whole GOP has already wagered so heavily on the Trump experiment that they’re not going to pull the plug regardless of what happened.

I think the best a Democrat can hope for is that Trump does not get reelected. And maybe there will be enough Democrats in the Senate after 2018 election to monkey-wrench Trump from replacing Supreme Court Justices with Anthony Scalia clones. The GOP did it to Obama and maybe the Democrats can take revenge on Trump nominated Justices.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 1:59 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Part One; Friedman is saying the Russians did it
what?
Quote:

so lets take action
What?
Sloppy words, sloppy thinking. WHAT did the Russians "do"? You can't "take action" unless you're specific about what you're trying to correct.

As far as I can tell, Russians did two things:

1) They snooped, benignly, on various servers. Now, just because they didn't DO anything while they were snooping doesn't mean they COULDN'T HAVE. So we need to beef up our server security significantly. I've been an advocate of paper ballot voting and hand-counting ever since the 2000 election (Black box voting http://blackboxvoting.org) and have been agitating for better overall cybersecurity ever since whenever.

WHAT ELSE, pray tell THUGR, am I supposed to advocate for that will satisfy your paranoid blood-lust?

BTW, it turns out that social media is turning to hardcopy as well, since they will be sending ... get this ... postcards via USPS to verify physical addresses before allowing ad purchases.

2) They had 13 trolls operating to sway American public opinion. Wow. 13. Between you, GSTRING, KRAPO (who btw is a foreigner), JO-IDIOCRACY, TWITCHY, and DULLBADGUY, all of whom classify as trolls, we've got half that number right here! Say, did any of YOU manage to sway public opinion via social media?

I thought not.

Those 13 people did what? They forwarded and amplified ideas that were ALREADY in the public arena. So what??? The reaction for THAT is to teach people how to be more intelligent consumers of the media, NOT to clamp down on the free speech rights of Americans.


Quote:

Part two; Sig is a Russian troll and upset because Friedman just criticized both Trump and Russia.
I'm a Russian troll because somebody else did something? Epic logic fail there, THUGR. You're 100% wrong about me, and I look forward to the day when I can take you to court. So keep at it.

BTW, you remind me of this asswipe character, Melvin, in Tremors especially at 1:48


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 2:17 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.

Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.

I guarantee that the Democrats will NOT get the necessary 2/3 majority in the 2018 election. Democrats shouldn’t get their hopes up that the special counsel will “save” them or the country from Trump. And as you said, Trump appeared on national television and explained to an NBC News audience that he improperly used his powers of office to remove FBI director Comey in an effort to shield his friends and associates from criminal scrutiny. The GOP shrugged that off, and eventually, the public (both Democrats and Republicans) moved on.

My guess is that whatever revelations are forthcoming from Mueller will fit a similar pattern — most people already have a negative view of Trump, so it’s hard to move the needle too much more on public opinion, and the whole GOP has already wagered so heavily on the Trump experiment that they’re not going to pull the plug regardless of what happened.

I think the best a Democrat can hope for is that Trump does not get reelected. And maybe there will be enough Democrats in the Senate after 2018 election to monkey-wrench Trump from replacing Supreme Court Justices with Anthony Scalia clones. The GOP did it to Obama and maybe the Democrats can take revenge on Trump nominated Justices.



It should not be easy to remove a sitting president. Still, we know so much already that demands he be removed, in MHO. What we know is like a window into what transpired between Trump and the Russians. For myself and others who hope that Trump will be removed, that may be realized by what is yet to be learned and or revealed.

Mueller is looking into everything. I heard today we are going to learn a lot about how foreign lobbyists operate, and how that effects policy. Also, Trump has adhered to corrupt business practices from day one. With Muellers' investigation, the state DA at some point, will have access to more than enough evidence of corruption to go after Trump.

One way or the other...

T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 4:09 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Trump, after being criticized for his response to Russia's election meddling, challenged Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, to launch an investigation into the Obama administration for failing to do enough to stop the 2016 election foreign interference.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/966321700588711936

"He has been tougher on Russia in the first year than Obama was in eight years combined," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said during Tuesday's White House briefing.

Why, if Trump believes the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered, hasn't he enforced the sanctions he signed into law last August which were passed by Congress to punish Russia for its actions?

Sanders reiterated that Trump has been "tougher on Russia" than his predecessor.

www.businessinsider.com/sarah-sanders-trump-russia-sanctions-after-mue
ller-indictments-2018-2

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 4:42 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by SECOND:
Trump, after being criticized for his response to Russia's election meddling, challenged Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, to launch an investigation into the Obama administration for failing to do enough to stop the 2016 election foreign interference.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/966321700588711936

"He has been tougher on Russia in the first year than Obama was in eight years combined," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said during Tuesday's White House briefing.

Why, if Trump believes the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered, hasn't he enforced the sanctions he signed into law last August which were passed by Congress to punish Russia for its actions?

Sanders reiterated that Trump has been "tougher on Russia" than his predecessor.

www.businessinsider.com/sarah-sanders-trump-russia-sanctions-after-mue
ller-indictments-2018-2
]



I know, it's astounding isn't it. Nothing about Putin and Russia. Nope it's back to Obama, investigate Obama. This guys a bigger clown then we possibly could have imagined. And the people who back him still are much sicker that I thought.



T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 5:43 PM

THGRRI


Mueller asking if Manafort promised banker White House job in return for loan

Federal investigators are probing whether former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort promised a Chicago banker a job in the Trump White House in return for $16 million in home loans, two people with direct knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

The banker, Stephen Calk, president of the Federal Savings Bank, was announced as a member of candidate Trump's Council of Economic Advisers in August 2016.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mueller-asking-if-manafo
rt-promised-banker-white-house-job-return-n849916



T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 5:46 PM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
They had 13 trolls operating to sway American public opinion. Wow. 13. !



She's REALLY downplaying it AGAIN??? This wasn't a HOBBY for these people, undermining this country was their DAY JOB. No matter the EFFECT, it's the principle!

Obnoxious freaking Russians, man...







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:56 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
At times we reflect back on history. We remember events that have happened, especially ones of importance. Some of those historical events so boggle the mind they elicit a common response. How could people be so stupid?

Well, I give you Jack. People this stupid really do exist. The history of Trump and Russia is already being written. The truth of it will never penetrate Jacks sphere of ignorance. And people like always move on to their next insane interpretations of current events. Sadly, another thing history has taught us is that there is never a shortage of stupid people.

Being stupid is not a crime. Nor should people be punished and ridiculed for being inflicted with this abnormality. Unless, I'll say that again, Unless, they are being stupid in a mean spirted way. Again, I give you Jack. He is an angry drunk lashing out, choosing to troll rather than offer substantive feedback or acknowledge even the simplest of truths.


T



I haven't had a drink in almost 15 months.

Again I'll mention that I've made many great improvements in my life in that amount of time instead of whining and bitching about all the things in the world that I'm absolutely powerless to do anything about.

In that time you've let this all consume you until it's become a part of who you are. I understand why you find me to be an enemy even though it is you who attack my character and intelligence every time you post to or about me. You actually believe that I'm somehow attacking you personally when I don't agree with you.

I feel sorry for you, buddy.

Do try to remember that I was the one who posted the night that Trump won that we needed to come together. A post that you actually said was righteous.

It was you and Sigs that turned that thread into a massive shit show by the next day, and your behavior has only gotten worse since then.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 21, 2018 9:04 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

She's REALLY downplaying it AGAIN??? This wasn't a HOBBY for these people, undermining this country was their DAY JOB. No matter the EFFECT, it's the principle! - TWITCHY
Seeing as you're so huffy about THE PRINCIPLE! ...

Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?


****

Quote:

It was you and Sigs that turned that thread into a massive shit show by the next day, and your behavior has only gotten worse since then.- SIX
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:09 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Mueller asking if Manafort promised banker White House job in return for loan

Federal investigators are probing whether former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort promised a Chicago banker a job in the Trump White House in return for $16 million in home loans, two people with direct knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

The banker, Stephen Calk, president of the Federal Savings Bank, was announced as a member of candidate Trump's Council of Economic Advisers in August 2016.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mueller-asking-if-manafo
rt-promised-banker-white-house-job-return-n849916


T

Yep, Trump was in the White House in August 2016.
You fool.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:31 AM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
A post that you actually said was righteous.




I'm sure he just didn't have your full mental picture.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:34 AM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?




So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:51 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?

So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again...

You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:23 AM

WISHIMAY


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?



No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.



I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 7:51 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]



It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.

Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.

I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 10:38 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?

Thomas Friedman felt compelled to write about Trump's Twitter reaction to the newest indictments in Robert Mueller's special counsel investigation. If Trump is so innocent, why does he go to such extraordinary lengths to try to shut Mueller down? "There was something in Trump's reaction to Mueller that was deeply off." He called it "so unpresidential, it was frightening." Trump's tweets had assailed the FBI, the media, Democrats -- but not Moscow. "To me, it really crossed a line," Friedman said. While Trump has "broken many norms as president," these tweets were different.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/20/media/thomas-friedman-new-york-times-c
olumn/index.html


Trump has shown himself unwilling to defend America against a Russian campaign to divide and undermine our democracy.

That is, either Trump’s real estate empire has taken large amounts of money from shady oligarchs linked to the Kremlin — so much that they literally own him — or rumors are true that he engaged in misbehavior while he was in Moscow running the Miss Universe contest, which Russian intelligence has on tape; or Trump actually believes Russian President Vladimir Putin when he says he is innocent of intervening in our elections — over the explicit findings of Trump’s own CIA, NSA and FBI chiefs.

In sum, Trump is either hiding something so threatening to himself, or he’s incompetent to be commander in chief.

Trump’s behavior amounts to a refusal to carry out his oath of office — to protect and defend the Constitution. Here’s an imperfect but close analogy: It’s as if George W. Bush had said after 9/11: “No big deal. I am going golfing over the weekend in Florida and blogging about how it’s all the Democrats’ fault — no need to hold a National Security Council meeting.”

The President should lead our nation’s defense against this attack on the integrity of our electoral democracy.

What would that look like? He would educate the public on the scale of the problem; he would bring together all the stakeholders — state and local election authorities, the federal government, both parties and all the owners of social networks that the Russians used to carry out their interference — to mount an effective defense; and he would bring together our intelligence and military experts to mount an effective offense against Putin — the best defense of all.

What we have instead is a president vulgarly tweeting that the Russians are “laughing their asses off in Moscow”.

www.nytimes.com/2018/02/18/opinion/trump-russia-putin.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 10:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?- SIGNY

So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again... - TWITCHY

You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right? - JSF

No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.- TWITCHY



Well, WISHY, a few points:

1) You were all hot that this was a matter of PRINCPLE! Well, I just wanted to see how far your PRINCIPLES! extend. As it turns out, they don't extend to Democratic Presidents. Got it!
Oh and BTW- I bitched a lot harder about GWB than I did about Bill Clinton, so don't go on thinking that I'm some sort of GOP partisan hack, like you're a DNC partisan hack.

2) Do you really think what what happened yesterday isn't relevant to today? No illegality to recognize, or lessons to be drawn? Ok, then stop bitching and whining about what the RUSSIANS! did "yesterday" ... not relevant to RIGHT NOW. TODAY.

3) The United States' interference in other democracies' elections IS foreign relations, and IS properly the purview of the American President. I don't know what the hell you're smoking, but your mind is sure making a lot of u-turns and detours to avoid the conflict between what you SAY are your "principles" and their even-handed implementation in real life, including to our own foreign policy.

Just my $0.02.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 10:55 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Just my $0.02.

My two cents: My guess is what Trump is hiding has to do with money. Who can forget that quote from his son Donald Trump, Jr. from back in 2008: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets.” They may own our president.

But whatever it is, Trump is either trying so hard to hide it or is so naive about Russia that he is ready to not only resist mounting a proper defense of our democracy, he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:21 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

ready to not only resist mounting a proper defense of our democracy- SECOND


Elections, and how to hold them, are the purview of each State Secretary, and the counties therein. The Feds can provide assistance and guidance on cybersecurity, but they cannot legally tell the states how to run things ... unless you want to change the Constitution, that is. PERSONALLY, as I have said before, I believe the actual voting process should be paper ballots, counted by hand, in an open forum. As for voter rolls and gerrymandering ... there is so much partisan monkey-business going on there, neither of the two main parties have any interest in fixing the system because they look forward to the day when THEY have their hands on the levers of power. That's why the Dems didn't jump on the whole black box voting problem in 2000 and 2004, when it first became evident that the vote count could be electronically manipulated.

Quote:

he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.- SECOND
The institutions have undermined themselves. The NSA started an (illegal) universal snooping program under GWB which accelerated under Obama, as revealed by various whistleblowers including Snowden. There is, it is said, a giant NSA database of illegally-obtained surveillance which the NSA shares with other agencies, the game of which is to be able to re-create a plausible LEGAL pathway, applicable in court, for illegally-obtained information. That big data center in Utah? It's not there for shits and giggles, yanno.

The CIA illegally snooped on the Senate Intelligence Committee (yanno, the one that's supposed to provide "oversight" for our security state) as the committee was investigating CIA torture programs, and Brennan got up and lied, bald-faced, to Congress and the American people about it. And that's not including the CIA's illegal torture, rendition, gun-and-drug-running, and media infiltration programs which have made us so popular around the world.

The FBI made a complete mockery of any investigations regarding Hillary Clinton or the DNC. They never examined the laptops or other devices that Hillary's staff might have kept copies of emails on and in fact allowed them to be destroyed (with hammers); tossed out immunity like confetti to people who weren't even CHARGED with anything but who were simply acting as witnesses, making it impossible to charge or "turn" ANYone; did not place Hillary under oath; and NEVER examined the DNC server that was supposedly "hacked" by Russians, preferring instead to take the word of a DNC-contracted company. In other words, they did everything completely bass-akwards, presumably to spoil the investigations so thoroughly that they could never be re-opened again.

DOJ, FBI, and DNC officials - thru Fusion GPS- cooked up a "dossier" on Trump; contacting, I might add, who-knows-how-many unnamed "Russians" to obtain unverifiable Russian-sourced gossip, in order to obtain a FISA warrant.

The DOJ, FBI, and NSA then collectively used the security apparatus to target a Presidential candidate, and then President with leaks. All the while ignoring anything to do with the bribes and foreign money coming in from Russia (Uranium One) and Saudi Arabia (Clinton Foundation).

This is NOT an even-handed application of the law. The agencies need a "root and branch" cleaning.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:28 AM

THGRRI


Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, police, media and judicial systems. Nothing however about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?

Just as important, why do so many here not call her out on that. JSF, Rappy, Jack, kiki? Instead they avoid the topic of Russia as well. Except to mount a defense of Trump who doesn't mention Russia attacking us either.

Hey guys, don't you care about Russia doing what it is doing? Second, Wish, SGG, G/CC, JO KPO and others here do. Why don't you?

Enough, it's been a year and nothing about Russia attacking us. Speak up or shut up. Stop implying you represent the opinion of Americans because I don't see it. I don' believe it.




T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:41 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, media and judicial systems but nothing about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?
Because Russia will do what Russia will do, and we have no control over what THEY do. What we CAN do is "mount a proper defense" ... which I have been harping on for longer that you've been here ... get rid of the NSA-rigged Microsoft operating system (you DO know that the NSA refused to allow proper encryption on the MS operating system so that THEY could snoop in whenever they wanted, right? That this left everyone defenseless against criminal and political hackers, in order to convenience the NSA?) ... and put in proper air-gapped servers with appropriate backup for all critical functions like banks, utilities, hospitals, and government functions .... an eliminate those giant hackable commercial databases maintained by google, FB etc whose sole purpose is advertising.

Also, we've reached a kind of "balance of power" with Russia - altho they can damage us, we can damage them too.

So altho we can't control what Russia does, we DO have control over our response, and we DO have control (or at least we're supposed to have control) over our security agencies. So, yeah, that's why I focus ON US: because we can DO something about US. Not just bitch, whine, hyperventilate, and screech.

God, you're an idiot.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:50 AM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, media and judicial systems but nothing about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?
Because Russia will do what Russia will do, and we have no control over what THEY do.



And there you have it folks. Sig informs us Russia will do what it will do and there is nothing America can do about it. Russia, who has the same budget as Italy yet we can do nothing. No offence meant to the Italians.

For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it.

That's it, nothing more to say, and again no condemnation for what they are doing. As I've said for a very long time now. Sig trolls on behalf of Russia. The rest of you who don't call her out on that, you know who you are, are definitely not American. Nope, no way are you American.

Sig, kiki, Rappy, JSF, Jack, no way are you American.



T

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:08 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.- SECOND
The institutions have undermined themselves. The NSA started an (illegal) universal snooping program under GWB which accelerated under Obama, as revealed by various whistleblowers including Snowden. There is, it is said, a giant NSA database of illegally-obtained surveillance which the NSA shares with other agencies, the game of which is to be able to re-create a plausible LEGAL pathway, applicable in court, for illegally-obtained information. That big data center in Utah? It's not there for shits and giggles, yanno.

The CIA illegally snooped on the Senate Intelligence Committee (yanno, the one that's supposed to provide "oversight" for our security state) as the committee was investigating CIA torture programs, and Brennan got up and lied, bald-faced, to Congress and the American people about it. And that's not including the CIA's illegal torture, rendition, gun-and-drug-running, and media infiltration programs which have made us so popular around the world.

Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:35 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it. - THUGR
Again, you're an idiot.

YES, IT'S TERRIBLE (!!!) THAT 13 RUSSIANS TRIED TO INFLUENCE OUR ELECTIONS! THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN! IT'S A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!

There, is that enough hyperventilating for you?

So, NOW WHAT?


What are we supposed to do to "make" Russia conform to our ideas of what THEY should do? Bomb them? I mean, seriously, THUGR, what's your plan here??

Russia is a whole 'nother nation, like Britain or Brazil. How would you propose that we "make" Britain do what we want (like stay in the EU) or "make" Brazil do what we want (like clean up their corruption)? Are you saying that it is the right of the USA to go rampaging around the world, "making" other nations do what we want them to? I think we've been doing that for 50 years, and look where it's gotten us.

Defense of our interests is right and proper. Why don't we at least start with that, instead of hyperventilating about what somebody else is doing?

I guess this makes me something of an "isolationist". Look it up, THUGR. Before you start hyperventilating that it's "un-American" I think you'll find it's a venerable POV which has its origins with the Founding Fathers.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:47 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.


SECOND, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. You're turning a non-partisan problem in yet another endless screed against Republicans. The violations and mismanagement of the security agencies has been happening under BOTH parties. I'm not pinning this on Dems, or Repubs, but on BOTH.

I even made the point a while back that the very same Republicans who issued the Nunes memo (under the banner of transparency) were the very same Republicans who voted for the FISA 702 extension.

Your constant partisan blather doesn't excuse the fact that our security agencies have been running roughshod not only over our Constitutional protections but also our political processes. They need an investigation, from anus to head, and they need to be reined in. Whether it is the GOP that does it, or the Dems, or both - or Trump- or someone else - it needs to be done. Stop blame-shifting. This isn't a blame-game, or at least it shouldn't be, because there's enough to wrap all the way around five times over.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:55 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.


SECOND, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. You're turning a non-partisan problem in yet another endless screed against Republicans. The violations and mismanagement of the security agencies has been happening under BOTH parties. I'm not pinning this on Dems, or Repubs, but on BOTH.

I even made the point a while back that the very same Republicans who issued the Nunes memo (under the banner of transparency) were the very same Republicans who voted for the FISA 702 extension.

Your constant partisan blather doesn't excuse the fact that our security agencies have been running roughshod not only over our Constitutional protections but also our political processes. They need an investigation, from anus to head, and they need to be reined in. Whether it is the GOP that does it, or the Dems, or both - or Trump- or someone else - it needs to be done. Stop blame-shifting. This isn't a blame-game, or at least it shouldn't be, because there's enough to wrap all the way around five times over.

You are crazy if you think CIA is NOT a partisan problem. Example: the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture was all the Democrats voting against all the Republicans except one loner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_
CIA_torture


I will admit that the newest Senator, the first Democrat from Alabama, does a passable imitation of being a Republican, but if he were anything else than a faux-Democrat, the fine white people of Alabama would have voted for Trump's endorsed candidate, the child molester Roy Moore.

Occasionally Doug Jones will act as a Democrat, but he can't be relied upon because, you know, he was elected by white racists who, in a moment of weakness or mental clarity, would not tolerate the GOP's child molester. Doug Jones knows who elected him, as do I. He will please them if he can.

Doug Jones Has Been a Reliable Republican Vote
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2018/01/25/so-far-doug-jon
es-has-voted-with-the-gop-n2439306


The Republicans don't have a big problem of Republican Congressmen voting for Democratic party ideas. On the other hand, Democrats do have big problem of Democrats voting for GOP ideas. Did I mention Doug Jones?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 2:43 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


The CIA is everybody's problem.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:27 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?

No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.


I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.

We shouldn't let this slip by unnoticed. You have posted a valid worldview.

As soon as the Federal Budget is devoid of welfare, EPA, Dept of Uneducation, Art Grants, and all other welfare, your wish will be granted. I agree, and yes, I did vote for Johnson the last 2 times.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]

It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.

Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.

I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:53 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?

No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.


I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.

We shouldn't let this slip by unnoticed. You have posted a valid worldview.

As soon as the Federal Budget is devoid of welfare, EPA, Dept of Uneducation, Art Grants, and all other welfare, your wish will be granted. I agree, and yes, I did vote for Johnson the last 2 times.



I actually did agree with her comment here and was going to reply on it, but then I saw the insult she hurled my way just a few posts earlier and didn't bother.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:54 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem. The CIA can throw away video recordings of torturing prisoners because it would make the CIA look bad, and they can get away with it. There will be no punishment for the CIA by Congress cutting the CIA budget. The White House can't punish the CIA, when controlled by a Democrat, because it can't even discover who did what at the CIA when the CIA decides to lose all the relevant records. The only way to handle a situation where an out-of-control organization protects particular employees from their justly deserved punishment is to punish the entire organization and that means a budget cut, which only the Congressional Republicans can do. This nonsense at the CIA has been going on for decades, where it worms its way around control by any Democrat in the White House and can always run to its protectors: the GOP Congressmen.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 3:57 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it. - THUGR
Again, you're an idiot.

YES, IT'S TERRIBLE (!!!) THAT 13 RUSSIANS TRIED TO INFLUENCE OUR ELECTIONS! THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN! IT'S A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!

There, is that enough hyperventilating for you?

So, NOW WHAT?


What are we supposed to do to "make" Russia conform to our ideas of what THEY should do? Bomb them? I mean, seriously, THUGR, what's your plan here??

Russia is a whole 'nother nation, like Britain or Brazil. How would you propose that we "make" Britain do what we want (like stay in the EU) or "make" Brazil do what we want (like clean up their corruption)? Are you saying that it is the right of the USA to go rampaging around the world, "making" other nations do what we want them to? I think we've been doing that for 50 years, and look where it's gotten us.

Defense of our interests is right and proper. Why don't we at least start with that, instead of hyperventilating about what somebody else is doing?

I guess this makes me something of an "isolationist". Look it up, THUGR. Before you start hyperventilating that it's "un-American" I think you'll find it's a venerable POV which has its origins with the Founding Fathers.

Somebody has completely given up on Team America: World Police.
Can we still undermine free elections in Israel whenever we get another Communist anti-Semitic President?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:03 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.

JewelStaiteFan, then Jeff Sessions will indict Obama and Hillary. Otherwise you're talking empty conspiracy theories roaming like ghosts around your skull. If Jeff doesn't indict, that makes you a hallucinating old coot.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:03 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem. The CIA can throw away video recordings of torturing prisoners because it would make the CIA look bad, and they can get away with it. There will be no punishment for the CIA by Congress cutting the CIA budget. The White House can't punish the CIA, when controlled by a Democrat, because it can't even discover who did what at the CIA when the CIA decides to lose all the relevant records. The only way to handle a situation where an out-of-control organization protects particular employees from their justly deserved punishment is to punish the entire organization and that means a budget cut, which only the Congressional Republicans can do. This nonsense at the CIA has been going on for decades, where it worms its way around control by any Democrat in the White House and can always run to its protectors: the GOP Congressmen.

Shall we wait to hear of all the giant Budget Cuts of CIA from FY2008, FY2009, FY2010, FY2011 when Libtards controlled the purse strings?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:04 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]

It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.

Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.

I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.



I don't think there's sufficient data for this, at least in my experience. The RWED was always pretty bad, and I remember about 5 years ago basically begging that Wishy stay out of it because it wasn't a good place, and I really think she was a good person back then.

The only other sites I ever am a part of are dedicated to hobbies I enjoy and we keep the politics out of it. Every once and a while some joker will say something pertaining to politics and one of us tell them that there's no place for that here.

I don't really remember my time on Facebook. I was a drunk and I embarrassed myself in front of a lot of people I knew is all that I know. From the stories I hear about schisms it's created in my family I think it's pretty sad that everyone uses it. As terrible as I thought the RWED could be, at least you can say that this is a GREAT place for these types of conversations. At least we're not getting into heated arguments online with people we actually give a shit about and ruining REAL relationships when we argue on here.

I wasn't joking when I told Second the RWED is my dumping ground for all of this bullshit. It's actually a very important thing to me, and was especially important in those early months of getting sober. Outside of here there's only two people I talk to about politics and that's just because we largely agree on everything and we enjoy talking about it.

Hell... just the other night I met one of the day shift guys for the first time because he came out for a smoke as I was smoking mine before going in. We've said hi to each other before but that was it. We had a pretty interesting conversation but then somehow his dislike of Trump came into the conversation. I just smiled and laughed at whatever insult he said because at the end of the day I don't really give two shits. He seems like a cool guy. I'm not going to let politics start any arguments for me in real life. It's a shame that he had to bring them up at all, but that's the world we live in. There's absolutely zero ROI for me to argue with him or tell him that I thought Obama was a shitty president. Especially since he's black himself.

That's what the RWED is for. I'm going to miss this place when it's gone.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:06 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.



No it's not. It's everybody's problem.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:16 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.



No it's not. It's everybody's problem.

If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies


Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 4:47 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.



No it's not. It's everybody's problem.

If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies


Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.



What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?

Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.

They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 5:29 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.

No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.

No it's not. It's everybody's problem.

If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies


Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.

What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?

Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.

They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Libtards only want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens, and insensitive people. That way only Criminals and outlaws will have guns to take control of the sheeple.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 6:54 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?

Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.

They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.

Not a fantasy, Jack. I'll give you one example of how an out-of-control bureaucrat was finally made to obey: J. Edger Hoover. Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy each considered dismissing Hoover as FBI Director, but ultimately concluded that the political cost of doing so would be too great. Hoover scared off LBJ, too, and the details are fascinating. The Republicans never had a problem with Hoover. They loved him, as they love the CIA. Eventually, J. Edger died an old man in charge of the FBI. That strategy of waiting for time to solve a problem doesn't work for Democrats when it is an immortal government agency such as the CIA, not just some gay man Republican such as Hoover protected by the GOP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover#Late_career_and_death

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 8:51 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Historians and Scholars decide if a president is good or not Jack. Very educated people. Historians and Executive Branch experts. These experts, Democrat, Republican and Independent, together rated Trump dead last ( worst ever ). And you, you Jack, can't see for yourself any reason why. Any reason Jack.

The reasons for treating you like someone who's opinion should be respected are non existent Jack, non existent.
T
Quote:

How Does Trump Stack Up Against the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
2014 RANK, CHANGE IN RANKING, UP OR DOWN, TOP 10 IN 2018
1. Lincoln 95
6. Truman 75
7. Eisenhower 74
8. Obama 71
9. Reagan 69
10. L.B. Johnson 69
13. Clinton 64
16. Kennedy 62
17. G.H.W. Bush 61
25. Ford 47
26. Carter
30. G.W. Bush 40
33. Nixon 37
BOTTOM 10
44. Trump 12

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opin
ion/how-does-
trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html


Golly. EXPERTS!!
So Expert that they think the Next Addition to Mt. Rushmore should be Washington, T Roosevelt, or Lincoln!! Hint: they are already there.

So how might history look upon Trump? In this survey of Liberal experts, White House Alumni trends from 2014 to 2018 show GOP Nixon up one spot, Reagan up 2 spots, Bush 41 settled at 17 - the top half, Bush 43 up 5 spots. And Democraps Carter settled in the bottom half, and Clinton dropping 5 spots. The future polls look bad for Obama and good for Trump.

You mentioned that in this thread as well, so I copied this here, from the other thread:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.

29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicals
cience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pdf

Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.

57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.

This comingled group ranked Obama 16th Greatest President? Yep, they were Commies.

And these esteemed "political Scientists" were so clueless that, when asked which President should be ADDED to Mt. Rushmore, 5 of the 170 respondents voted for Washington, T Roosevelt, Lincoln. Hint: they are already there.

One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives.

Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking.
A Gallup poll shows that Americans self-identify as 38% Conservative and 24% Liberal, so those figures can be used to weight the results for balance.
Since the study admits the Liberals, Somewhat Liberals, and self-identified Moderates are essentially the same, these can be used as the sample of "Liberals" representing the 24%. First I calculated the overall figure among the 2 columns (Libs & Mods). The list below shows the resulting balanced Rank, and then balanced Rating, for the first 2 columns. The next 2 columns of Rank and Rating are results if we pretend that PoliSci experts who self-identify as "Moderates" are really not Liberals (and those results are not used in weighted balancing). In the 5th column I included the Rank presented in the Report. Then the Name and sequence number.

#1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16
#2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1
#3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32
#4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26
#5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3
#6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40
#7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34
#8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33
#9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41
10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7

11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44
12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2
13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4
14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36
15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25
16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42
17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5
18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28
19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11
20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27
21 55.50 20 56.26 16 61.86 Kennedy 35
22 53.78 22 52.76 24 51.01 Cleveland 22 & 24

23 52.32 24 51.44 28 42.23 Coolidge 30
24 51.71 23 51.96 23 51.90 JQ Adams 6
25 50.77 25 50.78 21 52.88 Grant 18
26 49.93 26 49.13 25 47.28 Ford 38
27 47.03 27 46.09 30 40.42 Bush 43
28 44.54 28 44.25 27 44.27 Van Buren 8
29 44.18 29 43.79 29 41.50 Hayes 19
30 43.06 30 43.19 31 39.90 Arthur 21
31 41.77 31 41.90 33 37.18 Nixon 37
32 39.31 32 39.38 26 45.04 Carter 39
33 39.03 33 38.60 34 36.69 Garfield 20
34 38.58 34 38.04 32 37.63 B Harrison 23

35 37.70 35 36.84 36 33.27 Hoover 31
36 35.58 36 34.98 35 33.34 Taylor 12
37 32.97 37 32.93 37 31.46 Tyler 10
38 29.81 38 29.79 38 27.71 Fillmore 13
39 28.76 39 29.05 39 25.26 Harding 29
40 23.04 40 22.79 40 24.91 A Johnson 17
41 22.42 41 22.42 41 23.25 Pierce 14
42 19.63 42 19.41 42 19.02 WH Harrison 9
43 19.13 43 18.51 44 12.34 Trump 45
44 14.20 44 14.23 43 15.09 Buchanan 15

GOP red, Democrat blue, Whig buff.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 22, 2018 9:35 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?

Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.

They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.

Not a fantasy, Jack. I'll give you one example of how an out-of-control bureaucrat was finally made to obey: J. Edger Hoover. Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy each considered dismissing Hoover as FBI Director, but ultimately concluded that the political cost of doing so would be too great. Hoover scared off LBJ, too, and the details are fascinating. The Republicans never had a problem with Hoover. They loved him, as they love the CIA. Eventually, J. Edger died an old man in charge of the FBI. That strategy of waiting for time to solve a problem doesn't work for Democrats when it is an immortal government agency such as the CIA, not just some gay man Republican such as Hoover protected by the GOP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover#Late_career_and_death



I was talking about you having another one of your delusional violent hero fantasies.

Everything you're saying about the CIA is true except that the GOP loves them. That's an idiotic generalization to group a bunch of individuals onto two sides and say that their opinions about the CIA differ only based on party lines.


If the Dems are so great, how come Obama didn't do anything about the CIA? I don't ever remember them coming up once in 8 years.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 23, 2018 1:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


SECOND, you have got to be kidding that the Democratic Party was any better at reining in the security agencies than the GOP

Quote:

In an interview published Monday by acTVism Munich, an independent media outlet, McGovern warned that U.S. intelligence agencies are too powerful to be held accountable, even by President Barack Obama. He explained:

“I will simply say that he is afraid of them. Now I would have never thought that I would hear myself saying that the president of the United States is afraid of the CIA. But he is. He’s afraid of the NSA as well. How else to explain that the National Intelligence director, who lied under oath to his senate overseers on the 12th of March 2013, is still the director of National Intelligence?”

Statements made under oath to Congress in 2013 by James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, in which he denied mass surveillance of Americans, were later revealed to be false by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. In 2014, some members of Congress, including California Rep. Darrell Issa, moved to have Clapper dismissed from his post, but their efforts were ultimately defeated.

McGovern continued: “How else to explain that the head of CIA, John Brennan, who deliberately hacked the computers of the senate’s intelligence community, that’s supposed to be overseeing him, he’s still in office?”

Brennan apologized to Senate leaders in July 2014 after CIA agents hacked Senate computers during a congressional investigation of the CIA’s use of torture, but neither the torturers nor the hackers would face any consequences for their actions. In January 2015, an internal CIA review board declared the hack had been a result of “miscommunication” and cleared all agents of wrongdoing.

In the interview, McGovern lamented the fact that political leaders, including President George W. Bush and Obama, have given their approval to unconstitutional behavior by government officials:

“Our bill of rights has been shredded. The Fourth Amendment specifically prohibits the kind of activities the NSA is involved in domestically.”

He also criticized Obama’s drone program, noting that “[t]he Fifth Amendment prohibits any president or anyone else from killing anyone without due process,” and dismissed the administration’s legal justifications for the killings as a “lawyerly diversion from the truth.”

“Not even George Bush claimed the right to kill American citizens without due process,” McGovern said.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/former-cia-analyst-ray-mcgovern-obama-af
raid-cia-nsa/214602
/

And what was Diane Feinstein (Senate Intelligence Committee) doing while all this was going on?

Keeping very, very quiet.

In addition, if it the FBI/NSA colluded with the DNC in the runup to the Presidential elections, like it LOOKS like they did, then Obama and the DNC are not only hip-deep in the security-agencies' illegal interference in foreign governments and in breaking the Constitution, they're also guilty of interference in our own domestic political processes.

Not saying that Obama is worse than GWB, but he's not any better. So fuck your rabid partisanship, SECOND. It's stupid, it's counterproductive, and it's nothing more than "virtue signaling" by someone whose economic status would be threatened by REAL reform. (In case you haven't figured it out, that means you.)

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 23, 2018 5:08 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.

29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.

Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.

57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.

One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives.

Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking.

The list below shows the resulting balanced Rank, and then balanced Rating, for the first 2 columns. The next 2 columns of Rank and Rating are results if we pretend that PoliSci experts who self-identify as "Moderates" are really not Liberals (and those results are not used in weighted balancing). In the 5th column I included the Rank presented in the Report. Then the Name and sequence number.
edited, added first column:
Quote:

-1.32 #1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16
+0.80 #2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1
-5.57 #3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32
-3.09 #4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26
-2.48 #5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3
+5.30 #6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40
-0.78 #7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34
-2.50 #8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33
+3.26 #9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41
+0.44 10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7

-8.69 11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44
-0.85 12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2
-2.13 13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4
-6.90 14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36
+6.63 15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25
-2.36 16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42
+0.49 17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5
-6.46 18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28
+3.36 19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11
+4.63 20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27
-6.36 21 55.50 20 56.26 16 61.86 Kennedy 35
+2.77 22 53.78 22 52.76 24 51.01 Cleveland 22 & 24

+10.09 23 52.32 24 51.44 28 42.23 Coolidge 30
-0.19 24 51.71 23 51.96 23 51.90 JQ Adams 6
-2.11 25 50.77 25 50.78 21 52.88 Grant 18
+2.65 26 49.93 26 49.13 25 47.28 Ford 38
+6.61 27 47.03 27 46.09 30 40.42 Bush 43
+0.27 28 44.54 28 44.25 27 44.27 Van Buren 8
+2.68 29 44.18 29 43.79 29 41.50 Hayes 19
+3.16 30 43.06 30 43.19 31 39.90 Arthur 21
+4.59 31 41.77 31 41.90 33 37.18 Nixon 37
-5.73 32 39.31 32 39.38 26 45.04 Carter 39
+2.34 33 39.03 33 38.60 34 36.69 Garfield 20
+0.95 34 38.58 34 38.04 32 37.63 B Harrison 23

+4.43 35 37.70 35 36.84 36 33.27 Hoover 31
+2.24 36 35.58 36 34.98 35 33.34 Taylor 12
+1.51 37 32.97 37 32.93 37 31.46 Tyler 10
+2.10 38 29.81 38 29.79 38 27.71 Fillmore 13
+3.50 39 28.76 39 29.05 39 25.26 Harding 29
-1.87 40 23.04 40 22.79 40 24.91 A Johnson 17
-0.83 41 22.42 41 22.42 41 23.25 Pierce 14
+0.61 42 19.63 42 19.41 42 19.02 WH Harrison 9
+6.79 43 19.13 43 18.51 44 12.34 Trump 45
-0.89 44 14.20 44 14.23 43 15.09 Buchanan 15

GOP red, Democrat blue, Whig buff.

I just noticed that this provides additional example of Liberal bias and imbalance. I'll try to reorganize with a new column showing the gain when removing the Liberal imbalance, like Trump gaining 6.79%.

+10.09 23 52.32 24 51.44 28 42.23 Coolidge 30
+6.79 43 19.13 43 18.51 44 12.34 Trump 45
+6.63 15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25
+6.61 27 47.03 27 46.09 30 40.42 Bush 43
+5.30 #6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40
+4.63 20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27
+4.59 31 41.77 31 41.90 33 37.18 Nixon 37
+4.43 35 37.70 35 36.84 36 33.27 Hoover 31
+3.50 39 28.76 39 29.05 39 25.26 Harding 29
+3.36 19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11
+3.26 #9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41

+3.16 30 43.06 30 43.19 31 39.90 Arthur 21
+2.77 22 53.78 22 52.76 24 51.01 Cleveland 22 & 24
+2.68 29 44.18 29 43.79 29 41.50 Hayes 19
+2.65 26 49.93 26 49.13 25 47.28 Ford 38
+2.34 33 39.03 33 38.60 34 36.69 Garfield 20
+2.24 36 35.58 36 34.98 35 33.34 Taylor 12
+2.10 38 29.81 38 29.79 38 27.71 Fillmore 13
+1.51 37 32.97 37 32.93 37 31.46 Tyler 10
+0.95 34 38.58 34 38.04 32 37.63 B Harrison 23
+0.80 #2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1
+0.61 42 19.63 42 19.41 42 19.02 WH Harrison 9
+0.49 17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5
+0.44 10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7
+0.27 28 44.54 28 44.25 27 44.27 Van Buren 8

-0.19 24 51.71 23 51.96 23 51.90 JQ Adams 6
-0.78 #7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34
-0.83 41 22.42 41 22.42 41 23.25 Pierce 14
-0.85 12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2
-0.89 44 14.20 44 14.23 43 15.09 Buchanan 15
-1.32 #1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16
-1.87 40 23.04 40 22.79 40 24.91 A Johnson 17
-2.11 25 50.77 25 50.78 21 52.88 Grant 18

-2.13 13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4
-2.36 16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42
-2.48 #5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3
-2.50 #8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33
-3.09 #4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26
-5.57 #3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32
-5.73 32 39.31 32 39.38 26 45.04 Carter 39
-6.36 21 55.50 20 56.26 16 61.86 Kennedy 35
-6.46 18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28
-6.90 14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36
-8.69 11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44


GOP red, Democrat blue, Whig buff.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 24, 2018 8:38 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by THGRRI:
tick tock comrade

Yanno, I wasn't going to go through the whole procedure with the lawyers.

You made it worth my time.

See you in court.




So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:47 - 236 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:10 - 590 posts
Trump on Joe Rogan: Full Podcast
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:05 - 7 posts
Israeli War
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:04 - 62 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:58 - 4657 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:45 - 4425 posts
Spooky Music Weird Horror Songs...Tis ...the Season...... to be---CREEPY !
Thu, October 31, 2024 16:19 - 56 posts
Sentencing Thread
Thu, October 31, 2024 15:11 - 381 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, October 31, 2024 14:25 - 921 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, October 31, 2024 13:46 - 7408 posts
No matter what happens...
Wed, October 30, 2024 23:43 - 21 posts
How do you like my garbage truck?
Wed, October 30, 2024 20:41 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL